We'll tax your beer, we'll tax your sin.

Move over parents, big brother is stepping in again. First they will deem what is "pleasurable", what is "sin" and then they'll tax these guilty pleasures in an attempt to initiate change. In the article "Obama says higher taxes on soft drinks should be explored", I found this new proposition another alarming attempt at the government sticking its unwanted foot further into our homes. First it was alcohol, then cigarettes, now sodas? "I actually think it’s an idea that we should be exploring," President Barack Obama said in an interview with Men’s Health magazine. For the record here, sodas have already been removed from schools in an attempt to "thin-out" the student population. Instead they've been replaced by diet alternatives and juices that may boast quite similar sugar content. But that is beside the point, in this article the idea has been proposed to actually up the cost of this item deemed as a "luxury". We'll pay for our "pleasures" through our pocketbooks it seems. I say we question these so-called "sin taxes". These are generally put on items that could "cause harm to people, such as alcohol or tobacco, and are geared to increase tax revenue and cause a slowdown in consumption"(Tinsley). But is this what they're actually doing? Are they slowing down consumption? Are these taxes succeeding in their purpose? And yet again this year the Senate Finance committee has proposed up-ing taxes yet again on on beer, wine and hard liquor. Really what needs to be said here, is that people will buy what they want to buy regardless. Niccotine addicts will buy their tobacco. Drinkers will buy their alcohol. Kids will guzzle their sodas. Who hurts here? I say the citizens do. The lower income families especially. "A tax on juice drinks and soda would further squeeze hardworking families already struggling to pay their bills and keep their health coverage...there could not be a worse time to ask them to pay more for the simple pleasures they enjoy," said Susan Neely, president of the American Beverage Association. This hardly seems fair.

If these politicians are so concerned with the health and future of today's youth, why have physical education program requirements been cut? These same lawmakers have removed the requirement that students must have health education courses before they can graduate. That's why this soda tax was propositioned in the first place; to benefit the youth. Obesity may be on the rise, but in my eyes the way to combat this is through education. Higher taxes are a burden, especially when the money is then spent foolishly on more government programs full of inadequacy. "We all want to improve healthcare, but taxes don’t make anyone healthy." That's the bottom line here.